Cornyn: For a GI bill that fits our volunteer military's needs

Increase benefits while recognizing service as career

U.S. SEN. JOHN CORNYN

Published 5:30 am, Friday, May 30, 2008

On Memorial Day, our nation pauses in respect for those who have paid the ultimate price defending the freedoms we hold dear. It is a solemn day of remembrance. Many public officials spend the day honoring the fallen and their families, as I did this year at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio.

So I was surprised that the Chronicle allowed a political opponent to use Memorial Day to launch a partisan attack over a legislative matter now pending in Washington ("Texas needs two senators who will back our veterans," by state Rep. Rick Noriega, Outlook, May 28).

At issue is expanding the Montgomery GI Bill, which provides educational benefits to veterans. In January, President Bush asked that benefits be updated, to better serve the needs of our all-volunteer military. He specifically sought educational benefits that are more transferable to family members, to support their educational goals and increase troop retention.

The differences between two competing responses to President Bush's call have not been adequately addressed. One bill, sponsored by Sen. James Webb, D-Va., views the military as a stepping-stone to another career. It focuses exclusively on those who have served and encourages them to leave.

The bill I support, co-sponsored by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also substantially increases benefits for service — but recognizes the military as a career and concentrates on retaining the skilled and trained enlistees who are vital to an all-volunteer force.

The original GI bill was written in 1944 to ease transition back to civilian life for hundreds of thousands of veterans — many of whom were drafted — at a time when our military was demobilizing. Today, everyone who joins does so by choice, and our military needs more, not fewer, motivated and professional leaders in all ranks.

In today's military, our personnel are often highly trained in electronics, nuclear power, mechanics, linguistics or force protection and special operations. Some recruits will choose to serve a single tour of duty and then move into civilian life. But our focus should be on finding ways to retain a healthy percentage of highly trained and skilled troops, to keep our forces the best in the world.

The McCain bill does exactly that. It increases educational benefits substantially for those who serve three years: It would provide some $58,000 in education benefits, more than 100 percent of the cost of a public four-year college education in Texas. Unlike the Webb bill, it allows benefits to be transferred to spouses and children, encouraging those who serve longer periods and help train others behind them. It also allows forgiveness of previously incurred student loans.

Both competing bills would increase benefits and assist in recruiting efforts. But the McCain bill would help in retaining volunteers, while the Webb bill would undercut that effort. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the Webb bill would cause a 16 percent reduction in re-enlistment rates, seriously depleting our trained forces and overtaxing further those who remain.

For a Texas senator, there are other considerations. Our state has dedicated resources to higher education, and both tuition and living costs are lower here. Additionally, the state's Hazelwood program allows Texas veterans to attend Texas public universities virtually tuition-free.

The Webb bill penalizes states like Texas by granting substantially expanded benefits to residents of states with higher costs. In effect, our Texas taxpayers will be subsidizing states that do not support higher education as we do.

Maintaining an all-volunteer military in a prosperous country is not an easy task. The Defense Department is responsible for protecting our country and its citizens. Its leadership opposes the Webb bill as undermining its ability to fulfill its responsibility.

I am well-aware of the benefits of the GI Bill. My father returned from a German POW camp and used the bill to complete school even while he served 31 years in the Air Force. I understand we can never fully repay those who have served.

But, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates has noted, we need to strike a careful balance: "Any enhancement of the education benefit, whether used in service or after retirement, must serve to enhance recruiting and not undercut retention," he wrote to Congress.

This is not about generosity to veterans. It is about providing educational benefits that meet the recruiting, retention and readjustment needs of our military, and those who have served.

As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, not a day goes by when I don't think about ways we can support our volunteer fighting men and women. We can best do so by making certain they have what they need to succeed in their mission.

We do not help them by launching partisan attacks at a time when we should be honoring those who have made the ultimate sacrifice on our behalf.

Cornyn, Texas' junior U.S. senator, serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where he is the top Republican on the airland subcommittee. He is vice chairman of the Senate Republican Conference and the Senate Select Committee on Ethics.